ArticleStatistics in medicine2026
Extended Joinpoint Regression Methodology for Complex Survey Data.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Temporal epidemiology and multi-source forecasting of hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome and leptospirosis in mainland China: An interpretable machine learning study.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- Burden, Trends, Associated Diseases and Predictions of Alopecia Areata in China, Japan, South Korea, and Globally: A GBD 2023 Analysis.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Article
- Extended Joinpoint Regression Methodology for Complex Survey Data.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Joinpoint regression can model trends in time-specific aggregated estimates. These methods have been developed mainly for non-survey data such as cancer registry data, and only recently have been extended to utilize survey data that accounts for complex sample designs resulting in non-zero correlation between the time-specific estimates. This correlation can occur for surveys with data from the same sampled units used across time points, for example, the annual National Health Interview Survey with multistage cluster samples using the same first-stage sampled clusters over consecutive time points. Another issue when modeling aggregated data is that the degrees of freedom for joinpoint analyses of multistage cluster samples are based on the number of time points, not the number of first-stage sampled clusters as used in survey methods. To address this, we propose models of individual-level data that incorporate both the correlation between time points and correct the degrees of freedom due to the sampling design that is needed for accurate inferences. Also, a modified design-based Akaike Information Criterion (M-dAIC) for model selection is proposed to account for complex sample designs. These new methods are empirically compared to existing methods using simulation studies and health survey data examples. The simulation studies indicated that this new individual-level model identified the true number of joinpoints more accurately than the established aggregate-level models for data collected using complex survey designs with moderate to large interclass correlation coefficients (ICC).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.